MMI Enterprises

If firing up through carb and popping only on deceleration then yer lean. Way you describe backfire though yer rich on slow speed.. Generic trouble shooting would be something like: check yer plug to see if it sooted/fouled up. Check for clogged or soaked air filter. Could be trash in a slow speed air circuit of yer carb or trash clogging yer float needle...spray some carb cleaner in the throat first or drop bowl to clean out and check if float needle is seating properly. Hang in there..one of the equipment repair guys probably chime in with something specific to that machine.

haha.. thanx we needed that

Yup.. if we think back and realize the word for such folk was always speculator/gambler. That word investor or investing that is pushed on the public so much these days smells too much like the word saving..as if it was all a sure thing. Over a year back before the major crash I told neighbors that it has to crash and that it would...mark my words, Told them no way no how am I buying a house (or rather it's equity as you point out Russell) for as much as they were. Neighbor laughed at me. I doubt he remembers the convo. Blinded by the light of all the money had in his invisable equity. Now he upside down. Typical buy now cause it gonna do nothing but go up. Turned out a similar scenary to the whole false valuation of the enron stuff didn't it..

btw.. whole lot of truth comin from Russell unknown writer. Thanx for sharing that Russell.

Jeff, Make sure to watch this guys archives to see if todays little economic debate on cnn shows up: Jeremy Siegel Article Listing Doubt it will show though cause he got thrashed by the other guy. Sorry..missed other guys name, but he spoke the truth of it. It's all inflationary and the stock prices/housing market had to fail cause it valued falsely. Was almost word for word what I saying.

Election woes defined by prose…..” by Jerry Molen We just experienced an over hyped, positively outrageous primary election season that has left me cold and wondering where the heads of our citizens are hiding out. Must be someplace where the sun doesn’t get to very often. At one time in my life I was a determined, dedicated and ever loyal registered Democrat. Then something happened (Lyndon Baines Johnson) that turned my life around and gave me much pause as to the veracity of a party that dwelt on and fed off of the most unfortunate among us. Some of those unfortunates were in their positions in life by way of their own choosing and others were there by circumstance. But always, always with a door open to them to reach for new heights, achieve new goals, change their lives for the better. And also, always ever present were the bottom feeders doing everything they could to take advantage of those who had not or have not seen the light of better days and times nor realizing they were in fact the masters of their own destiny. They had come to believe that they were dependent on those in power in Washington and that they would look out for them and take care of their every need. They are still waiting and expecting al those promised freebies. Most people aren’t even aware that the Democrats ruled Washington for over 40 years. It wasn’t until 1994 when the so called Gingrich Revolution changed that for a short period of time. Nor do people realize that it was the Dem’s that created the failed policies of the many entitlement programs that are falling apart right before our eyes. Please do not think I find the Republicans blameless in all this. They too, suffer from ego inflation and greed motivators built into the system. It’s just that the past few months I’ve listened to the rantings and railings of the left in America calling for more giveaways and better ways to obtain the proverbial ‘free lunch’. I think that to sum up my feelings and why I am so set apart from those within the circles of political power and influence can be illustrated best by a quote by noted basketball legend and talk show co-host Charles Barkley: “Poor people have been voting for Democrats for the last fifty years….and they are still poor”. And now with the election results comes the promises of “change”. “Change we can believe in.” “Change for the future”. When in fact if you really, I mean REALLY listen to what the new messiah is asking for is not ‘change of policy’ or ‘change for the better’. He is warning all of us that he wants our change all right, ‘loose change’, pocket change’, social change and political change……So people wake up. For if you don’t the change you get may not be the change you were expecting or the change you wanted. To close my screed, I want to leave you with some JM predictions in the event the junior Senator from Illinois becomes President and especially if the House and Senate are veto proof. 1). Strict new gun laws will be enacted even though he promised he would not. 2). The phrase “In God We Trust” will be removed from all currency. 3). He will back away from his pledge to Israel and leave them to the wolves of Islam. 4). Hillary Clinton will be named to the Supreme Court. 5). Tax rates will return to their highest levels in 30 years. 6). The capital gains tax will be at least double current levels. 7). Retired Army General Wesley Clark will be named Secretary of Defense. 8). The borders will be ‘basically open’ to all comers. Especially those from the Middle East and South America. 9). Amnesty will be granted to all illegals now in the U.S regardless of status or even gang members (MS-13). and 10). The war in Iraq will be brought to an abrupt end and the results will be tragic and the consequences to our military will be devastating. I realize that my predictions may not sit too well with some people and the best we could all hope for is that I am totally wrong. Any bets? Jerry Molen

Man yer smokin somethin over there aren't you? Anyone can see that yer reading too much into what I have said.

What we got now Obama calling for a 3 mon. hold on foreclosure procedures? how smart is that? Surely there is small biz involved in making money off all that goes with foreclosing and remarketing a house. There goes the free market/low market that relies on letting the chips fall where they may. Yup just let those that aren't paying stay that much longer in ripping off the banks. Look at it this way..nothing in way of some magical income gain is going to befall those folks that are facing their mortgage balloons or interest rate hikes.It's not like all those specialty loans have them just on the edge of being able to afford them. They way out their league. One problem with the call for a hold is that it doesn't recognize your standard everyday foreclosures. Everwhere has a certain avg percentage figure for foreclosures per month. So also, what are all these programs Obama is planning to do away with?

Scott people base their pick on what the candidates say they plan to do perhaps as much as they suspect they will be able to do. Wouldn't be very smart to vote for someone that pretty much promises to be be working on this or that when you would rather have them working on something else..so I really don't get your first point of your last post other than maybe your just trying to minimize folks fears of an even worse bias against those that pay tax. Perhaps a good point on the 'more than 100%' that you bring up is that the portion above 100% would be from the earned income credit and is seperate figure in itself enough so that things still show as taxes being paid. Is a sliding scale with the mid point of the qualification range crediting more. Where the candidates are on EIC and how it woud effect savings/amounts paid on the info link Beth provided may be in question. Have seen similar example of people wanting work but not being able to be flexible enough to suit. Such schedule usually reflects having to care for children.

For me it doesn't matter if they gay or they just hoodwinking the system in business partnership, as Dan mentions, for to gain the same advantages offered to certain people(a man and a woman)....NOBODY has right to force down the throat of the majority or the minority a sudden definition change of a historical word. Is a cryin shame to go stealing and making something your own that doesn't belong to you. Theives!! Go get yer own word!, Go get yer own advantage!. Looks like we agree eh Jeff? YES ON 8!!

Trey you really don't have to call names directly. Can't you just say "that" or "that idea" or "that thing you push" is a joke?

Beth..what no dem blog links for this thread for over an hour, what happened?:)

Today in Investor's Business Daily stock analysis and business news Barack Obama's Stealth Socialism INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY Posted 7/28/2008 Election '08: Before friendly audiences, Barack Obama speaks passionately about something called "economic justice." He uses the term obliquely, though, speaking in code — socialist code. During his NAACP speech earlier this month, Sen. Obama repeated the term at least four times. "I've been working my entire adult life to help build an America where economic justice is being served," he said at the group's 99th annual convention in Cincinnati. And as president, "we'll ensure that economic justice is served," he asserted. "That's what this election is about." Obama never spelled out the meaning of the term, but he didn't have to. His audience knew what he meant, judging from its thumping approval. It's the rest of the public that remains in the dark, which is why we're launching this special educational series (IBD Series: The Audacity Of Socialism). "Economic justice" simply means punishing the successful and redistributing their wealth by government fiat. It's a euphemism for socialism. In the past, such rhetoric was just that — rhetoric. But Obama's positioning himself with alarming stealth to put that rhetoric into action on a scale not seen since the birth of the welfare state. In his latest memoir he shares that he'd like to "recast" the welfare net that FDR and LBJ cast while rolling back what he derisively calls the "winner-take-all" market economy that Ronald Reagan reignited (with record gains in living standards for all). Obama also talks about "restoring fairness to the economy, "code for soaking the "rich" — a segment of society he fails to understand that includes mom-and-pop businesses filing individual tax returns. It's clear from a close reading of his two books that he's a firm believer in class envy. He assumes the economy is a fixed pie, whereby the successful only get rich at the expense of the poor. Following this discredited Marxist model, he believes government must step in and redistribute pieces of the pie. That requires massive transfers of wealth through government taxing and spending, a return to the entitlement days of old. Of course, Obama is too smart to try to smuggle such hoary collectivist garbage through the front door. He's disguising the wealth transfers as "investments" — "to make America more competitive," he says, or "that give us a fighting chance," whatever that means. Among his proposed "investments": • "Universal," "guaranteed" health care. • "Free" college tuition. • "Universal national service" (a la Havana). • "Universal 401(k)s" (in which the government would match contributions made by "low- and moderate-income families"). • "Free" job training (even for criminals). • "Wage insurance" (to supplement dislocated union workers' old income levels). • "Free" child care and "universal" preschool. • More subsidized public housing. • A fatter earned income tax credit for "working poor." • And even a Global Poverty Act that amounts to a Marshall Plan for the Third World, first and foremost Africa. His new New Deal also guarantees a "living wage," with a $10 minimum wage indexed to inflation; and "fair trade" and "fair labor practices," with breaks for "patriot employers" who cow-tow to unions, and sticks for "nonpatriot" companies that don't. That's just for starters — first-term stuff. Obama doesn't stop with socialized health care. He wants to socialize your entire human resources department — from payrolls to pensions. His social-microengineering even extends to mandating all employers provide seven paid sick days per year to salary and hourly workers alike. You can see why Obama was ranked, hands-down, the most liberal member of the Senate by the National Journal. Some, including colleague and presidential challenger John McCain, think he's the most liberal member in Congress. But could he really be "more left," as McCain recently remarked, than self-described socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders (for whom Obama has openly campaigned, even making a special trip to Vermont to rally voters)? Obama's voting record, going back to his days in the Illinois statehouse, says yes. His career path — and those who guided it — leads to the same unsettling conclusion. The seeds of his far-left ideology were planted in his formative years as a teenager in Hawaii — and they were far more radical than any biography or profile in the media has portrayed. A careful reading of Obama's first memoir, "Dreams From My Father," reveals that his childhood mentor up to age 18 — a man he cryptically refers to as "Frank" — was none other than the late communist Frank Marshall Davis, who fled Chicago after the FBI and Congress opened investigations into his "subversive," "un-American activities." As Obama was preparing to head off to college, he sat at Davis' feet in his Waikiki bungalow for nightly bull sessions. Davis plied his impressionable guest with liberal doses of whiskey and advice, including: Never trust the white establishment. "They'll train you so good," he said, "you'll start believing what they tell you about equal opportunity and the American way and all that sh**." After college, where he palled around with Marxist professors and took in socialist conferences "for inspiration," Obama followed in Davis' footsteps, becoming a "community organizer" in Chicago. His boss there was Gerald Kellman, whose identity Obama also tries to hide in his book. Turns out Kellman's a disciple of the late Saul "The Red" Alinsky, a hard-boiled Chicago socialist who wrote the "Rules for Radicals" and agitated for social revolution in America. The Chicago-based Woods Fund provided Kellman with his original $25,000 to hire Obama. In turn, Obama would later serve on the Woods board with terrorist Bill Ayers of the Weather Underground. Ayers was one of Obama's early political supporters. After three years agitating with marginal success for more welfare programs in South Side Chicago, Obama decided he would need to study law to "bring about real change" — on a large scale. While at Harvard Law School, he still found time to hone his organizing skills. For example, he spent eight days in Los Angeles taking a national training course taught by Alinsky's Industrial Areas Foundation. With his newly minted law degree, he returned to Chicago to reapply — as well as teach — Alinsky's "agitation" tactics. (A video-streamed bio on Obama's Web site includes a photo of him teaching in a University of Chicago classroom. If you freeze the frame and look closely at the blackboard Obama is writing on, you can make out the words "Power Analysis" and "Relationships Built on Self Interest" — terms right out of Alinsky's rule book.) Amid all this, Obama reunited with his late father's communist tribe in Kenya, the Luo, during trips to Africa. As a Nairobi bureaucrat, Barack Hussein Obama Sr., a Harvard-educated economist, grew to challenge the ruling pro-Western government for not being socialist enough. In an eight-page scholarly paper published in 1965, he argued for eliminating private farming and nationalizing businesses "owned by Asians and Europeans." His ideas for communist-style expropriation didn't stop there. He also proposed massive taxes on the rich to "redistribute our economic gains to the benefit of all." "Theoretically, there is nothing that can stop the government from taxing 100% of income so long as the people get benefits from the government commensurate with their income which is taxed," Obama Sr. wrote. "I do not see why the government cannot tax those who have more and syphon some of these revenues into savings which can be utilized in investment for future development." Taxes and "investment" . . . the fruit truly does not fall far from the vine. (Voters might also be interested to know that Obama, the supposed straight shooter, does not once mention his father's communist leanings in an entire book dedicated to his memory.) In Kenya's recent civil unrest, Obama privately phoned the leader of the opposition Luo tribe, Raila Odinga, to voice his support. Odinga is so committed to communism he named his oldest son after Fidel Castro. With his African identity sewn up, Obama returned to Chicago and fell under the spell of an Afrocentric pastor. It was a natural attraction. The Rev. Jeremiah Wright preaches a Marxist version of Christianity called "black liberation theology" and has supported the communists in Cuba, Nicaragua and elsewhere. Obama joined Wright's militant church, pledging allegiance to a system of "black values" that demonizes white "middle classness" and other mainstream pursuits. (Obama in his first book, published in 1995, calls such values "sensible." There's no mention of them in his new book.) With the large church behind him, Obama decided to run for political office, where he could organize for "change" more effectively. "As an elected official," he said, "I could bring church and community leaders together easier than I could as a community organizer or lawyer." He could also exercise real, top-down power, the kind that grass-roots activists lack. Alinsky would be proud. Throughout his career, Obama has worked closely with a network of stone-cold socialists and full-blown communists striving for "economic justice." He's been traveling in an orbit of collectivism that runs from Nairobi to Honolulu, and on through Chicago to Washington. Yet a recent AP poll found that only 6% of Americans would describe Obama as "liberal," let alone socialist. Public opinion polls usually reflect media opinion, and the media by and large have portrayed Obama as a moderate "outsider" (the No. 1 term survey respondents associate him with) who will bring a "breath of fresh air" to Washington. The few who have drilled down on his radical roots have tended to downplay or pooh-pooh them. Even skeptics have failed to connect the dots for fear of being called the dreaded "r" word. But too much is at stake in this election to continue mincing words. Both a historic banking crisis and 1970s-style stagflation loom over the economy. Democrats, who already control Congress, now threaten to filibuster-proof the Senate in what could be a watershed election for them — at both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue. A perfect storm of statism is forming, and our economic freedoms are at serious risk. Those who care less about looking politically correct than preserving the free-market individualism that's made this country great have to start calling things by their proper name to avert long-term disaster.

Real info?.. the party is the source of truth as far as Obam's past dealings or inclinations?. It is rediculous to say proven fact is untrue. That said, your welcome to share all disproven things of the ties mentioned in the article. I don't know either way if they true or not..Obviousley the ties mentioned are likely valid. But you Beth seem to know all about Obama's past so let's hear what of it is true and what of it is false. I really want to know the facts of how he's not a socialist by who he's rubbed up against. Usually only spiritual advisors delve into having to be too close too that which soils. They know very well the risks and pray for strength when they have chores of ridding evil by going close to the enemy. I don't see an inkling of such fear involved with Obama. He seems to embrace his past and his need to keep his enemies close smells of going way deeper than the standard reason for keeping your enemies close.

If you thought corps(which you call big business), that you and I own by way of shares of our retirements or direct investment, was gonna flip bill for the war or what sheik habib is charging than you might just be off yer rocker. It has always been known that America will pay in some shape or form for the huge expendatures. I haven't at all agreed to what Bush has done on spending.. I agree that much can be translated into being a hidden tax. What I don't get is you want to tax yourself coming and going by way of both personal income tax and tax placed upon your own investment growths. What don't you get about leaving corp alone so you can reap the rewards. Why do you think a dividend or a stock sale is low or high? Go ahead and double tax yerself with obama's plan if you care more to actually see your money fly out your wallet. Yes there is problems and dirty dealings that have screwed us all out of investment money but how you get off claiming McCain doesn't have goal to curb the problems more than the other guy. Pure and simple or the KISS mentality should apply with taxation. Who do you think there is some magic money grubbing wizzard running the brick road that steals all our corp money and burries it away never to be seen of again. Screw the main share or corp America and ya screw yerself. Just look to your invest or retire bottom line as of late from the markets going from the 11k to the 8k range. Yea that's taxation if ya twist or broaden the definition enough and you want more of it actually written into law?. Just raise taxes for everyone and the corps too to 55% and cure it all in one swift rape...yea that's the ticket. Hey let's tax this forum..make as much sense as taxing a corp or taxing a high income individual more than their fair share. Jeff if you built your business to point of qualifying for the new up and coming tax brackets by the Obama plan I congratulate you and your happiness at paying half your income to the goobermint as well as loosing a good portion of the corps profit to a further tax. But anyways, you got yer mind set and ya got all these fanciful ideas to listen to of how further taxation will fix it all so have fun. I really do hope you enjoy working even more to take home even less.

Truest statements the last few posts are there between the lines. They are the ones about worrying about Obama and not being an expert. Sad to repeat McCain but some ya just 'don't understand'. What fits better into the 'being for the average joe' than a tax plan that is fair to all? Nobody owns the average joe figure of speech Jeff so you are welcome to use it even though it really belongs to republican ideals. Just cause some you guys are middle class ya think it fair to pay less percentage of tax?. That isn't the America I luv and believe in. A rich person deserves to pay the same rate as you. It is fundamental to our core beliefs as Americans that people are treated equally. What's just as rediculous is this whole dem/lib mentality would have corps paying higher taxes as well. That is just simply retarded and regressive since we the people own the corps. Yes huge profits don't belong in the hands of corp heads as they do. It is obscene, but that is up to the inner workings of the boards and their investors. In the end if people don't like giving up their fair share of corp profit in order that they have a superb performer at the top then they should not invest in that company or get involved more. It is just dumb dumb dumb to double tax yerselves. Where do the candidates stand on double taxing. One is a dang robbinhooded commy socialist wanting his hand in all four pockets. I can live with some socialist ideas such as when it applies to astronomical healthcare flaws. But in general I am for less goobermint. Both republicans and democrats no not what they do when they make more red tape. YUP YUP YUP. make more regs so we can fill the roles so we can service the regs. I see the inner workings of what goobermint produces. Everybody I work for, or relatives work for the state in my capital city. What a total cluster F' waste of money. They sit in their offices making and producing nothing. Lawmakers and their State, local, and fed workers on the take are a bigger drain on American way of life than the poor welfare recips are, or the homeless, or the illegals combined. If it weren't for yup lib attitude thrashing the heck out of the original founding documents we wouldn't be in the mess we are as there would be less ways to steal it from ya...but anyways., enjoy Beths blog spam..as if stuff in blogs are truth or quantity and saying something enough makes it so or more important than core belief.

spammer!..lol

Jeff you are well intentioned...I like ya. Seems ya siding with a change for sake of a change though. Just realize once he gets the bully pulpit he can be the man you talk about here: "You know many liked McCain just back 6-8 years ago, he was known as being middle of the road which most of America is.......I might of voted for him......" Most of what I know of your values have tended to be more conservative in nature than your choice reflects. Maybe run through that abc questionaire I first put up in the Barack Stealthy thread (Abc's match'o matic http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/MatchOMatic...page?id=5542139 ) as well as the one centex just put up and report back to us how you come out.I really want to know how much of obama you are like minded with.. "Also a lot of it is he's just to old, I want a man on top of his game, not in his declining years." Your saying he not on his game?? Remember that thing called the surge? Remember him firing his own people when it was needed? Him and Palin will get more done in way of keeping the good on tract and suppressing the bad than the high hopes/messiah candidate could ever dream or fantasize about. Dude he not just older and wiser, he is on. Any of us could only dream to be as active when we his age. Post election things are gonna change but I suspect they gonna change without as much risk, without throwing the baby out with the bathwater, and without high hopes Obama fumbling the ball.

Dude..then why you not being responsable in voting for McCain then? I don't get you mang!

Dude..WELL SAID!!!:lgbow:

Current facts or known truths of these ties could use a checking into. Tom Sullivans stand in on my local radio kicked a lady off the air today for continueing to spread what he called in so many words as a dirty little lie that has been disproven.I don't know myself so..

Could perhaps correlate some the info/events you posted above to the warnings of socialism presented here: http://www.thegrimescene.com/forums/club-house/14905-worthy-thing-fight-baracks-stealthy-socialism.html

Just sharing what's out there James..no conspiracy intentions implied or stated by posting it. If some of it is untruthful facts you should share it up. I did preface the title with a question mark in order that we get opinions such as you offer. Thanx for sharing your situation abit and God bless you and yours. I hope he finds you all in good health sooner than later... My opinion though is that neither candidate is the messiah and neither can be expected to fix it all or take full blaim or credit on how it all goes down the next four year. However, I can respect myself in my voting decission better by realizing or acknowledging that just cause one main issue would be near the top of my list as needing attention it doesn't mean a darn thing if it doesn't really get fixed or other fundamental issues go the wayside. See I too place healthcare very high same as you. I don't think it prudent or smart to go on one or two issue but rather the whole package must make sense to gain my vote. I could sit and order the issues into a prioritzed list but what good that do when I don't truly believe the entangled redtape web I call goobermint can be minimized from our lives and wallets as it needs to be by any of them? If both parties are evil and but the choice has to be made, which is best suited to limit the damages already done or do a thing or two in a moderate way? And when I say 'damages' I don't just mean financial. Apply it directly to things like freedoms, world view,economy, healthcare, you name it. Regardless of the actual candidates, one parties fundamentals I lean more towards and haven't seen the other produce a candidate bipartisan or middle grounded enough yet to go with. Try this little question based decission maker thing: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/MatchOMatic...page?id=5542139 My results said enough on how I should not listen to just one issue. I came out all McCain on the questions but for the two healthcare ones so perhaps we are not all that different. Shocked me pretty good as I was scared throughout that I may be leaning left...haha. Would be interesting to hear how everyone comes out on this and if it at all corresponds with their current candidate choice..

Guess someone did the poll and is why this thread came up again. I'll comment... Higher octane adds no power for normal/lower compression engines. If anything the regular has more potential than higher octane. When you get into higher compression ratios the higher octane can result in more torque and horsepower though due to extended burn it offers. Make no mistake the extra power comes really from the higher compression such engines offers. Running as low a octane that your stock/low compression engine will tolerate without knock and ping is ideal to acheive most bang for your buck.

What kind of old practices you refer to?.. All the ones that McCain claims to be fighting and not apart of or the ones that Obama goes ahead and votes for cause he wanted to seem busy, or didn't know what the reprocussions were from his vote, or just wanted to be different by supporting a change. Change is not always for the better. Obama's hatchet/scalpal comment was hypocracy and all he did was play follow the leader last night. Way I see it McCain's experience and outlook represented plugging the tub, turning off the water, not throwing the baby out with the bathwater, and but using some baby shampoo so as to not burn the eyes. Where Obama's experience and actions represents him as hearing emergency broadcast system telling him to throw kid in cold tub with no water and wash them down with a wet one.Obama goes where the wind blows to try and earn a change buck.